Con Kolivas wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:13 am, Peter Williams wrote:
If the plugsched patches were included in -mm we could get wider testing
of alternative scheduling mechanisms. But I think it will take a lot of
testing of the new schedulers to allay fears that they may introduce new
problems of their own.
When I first generated plugsched and posted it to lkml for inclusion in -mm it
was blocked as having no chance of being included by both Ingo and Linus and
I doubt they've changed their position since then. As you're well aware this
is why I gave up working on it and let you maintain it since then. Obviously
I thought it was a useful feature or I wouldn't have worked on it.
I've put a lot of effort into reducing code duplication and reducing the
size of the interface and making it completely orthogonal to load
balancing so I'm hopeful (perhaps mistakenly) that this makes it more
acceptable (at least in -mm).
My testing shows that there's no observable difference in performance
between a stock kernel and plugsched with ingosched selected at the
total system level (although micro benchmarking may show slight
increases in individual operations).
Anyway, I'll just keep plugging away,
Peter
--
Peter Williams [email protected]
"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
-- Ambrose Bierce
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
